Edit warring at Steele dossier
I don't like templating a regular, but just for the record you need an official warning for your tendentious editing:
Your recent editing history at Steele dossier shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. -- Valjean (talk) 16:03, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
- There's also a WP:OWN template which I ought to give you. Please follow BRD, as for the record you started the edit war. Mr Ernie (talk) 16:10, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
Your comment on ANI
Apparently an opportunity to attack and assume bad faith of MastCell is too good to miss.[1] Why do you lower the tone on ANI by talking like that? Do you realize that people can be page-blocked from ANI if they post enough such stuff? It has happened. Bishonen | tålk 18:43, 8 March 2022 (UTC).
- It's possible to 'lower the tone' of ANI? Arkon (talk) 18:56, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- What do you know! I agree with Mr Ernie, and I disagree with Bishonen. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:33, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- What if I called them an "extremist left-wing partisan warrior" instead? That type of language seems to be ok, although granted it was just at my talk page and not the august and stately halls of ANI. Mr Ernie (talk) 22:05, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Bish I trust you'll be approaching Floq about their "lowering the tone" as well. Thanks in advance. Mr Ernie (talk) 16:26, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Well this is disappointing to see, but not unexpected I suppose. PackMecEng (talk) 03:02, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
- I just now saw this, and it is more than disappointing, PME. Imagine how it makes me feel considering the circumstances. I'm so sorry this happened to you, Mr Ernie. Tryptofish, thank you for your forthrightness. I just hope the intimidation ends here, but the patterned history doesn't make me hopeful. Atsme 💬 📧 18:47, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
- Well this is disappointing to see, but not unexpected I suppose. PackMecEng (talk) 03:02, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
That Hunter Biden laptop page is something else huh
I appreciate that you're basically the lone voice of reason among what is very clearly a Blue-Anon echo chamber. Keep up the good work. They just reverted one of my edits in that talk page after implying I was a Fox viewer and denigrating "MAGA" people.
It's amazing people like this are able to have influence over what is considered accurate information when all they do is post baseless conspiracy theories. I mean the entire first paragraph of that page is now basically a lie, and do you think they'll honestly change it?
Wikipedia has become an insane echo chamber, I swear. I really do appreciate people like you who try to hold entries to the standards the people running things claim they hold them to. Much respect. 24rhhtr7 (talk) 17:50, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for saying what you did in the Admin action page or whatever it's called. I appreciate you pointing out exactly what I was trying to point out about the nature of the entry and the Talk page, even if you disagree with my behavior.
- Keep up the great work as an objective voice of reason. I've definitely had my fill of these political entries. Happy editing! 24rhhtr7 (talk) 07:39, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
DS alert us politics
- @NewsAndEventsGuy You are required to check for prior alertness before leaving this. As you obviously have not, I can only interpret this alert as harassment. Please remove it. Mr Ernie (talk) 23:57, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Mr Ernie, may I recommend a banner similar to what I have at the top of my UTP? If someone attempts to leave a DS alert message, it triggers a filter that advises the editor of a long list of topics that I'm aware of, and quickly cures the problem. It's quite handy. You are welcome to copy it. Atsme 💬 📧 00:21, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- That’s a good idea. I had expected that editors attempt a minimum checking before issuing these nasty templates. Sorry that the news guy was too busy for that. I’m clearly aware as a 10 second search would discover. Easier just to drop the menacing template I suppose. Mr Ernie (talk) 01:50, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Mr Ernie, may I recommend a banner similar to what I have at the top of my UTP? If someone attempts to leave a DS alert message, it triggers a filter that advises the editor of a long list of topics that I'm aware of, and quickly cures the problem. It's quite handy. You are welcome to copy it. Atsme 💬 📧 00:21, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Actually, I participated in creating this system and religously check the system log. Here's yours. These DSAlert expire after 12 months, and as you can see, you have not had the US Politics DS alert in the prior 12 months. Since we're expected to WP:Assume good faith, you can assume I know its a no-fault/no-cause FYI and nothing more... besides reading the relevant P&G pages, I was there when we made them. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 00:49, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- PS By the way, casting unfounded accusations of harrassment is often considered to be an WP:NPA violation. I'm willing to chalk this up to honest misunderstanding, but ask that you to use strike out or otherwise retract your "harrassment" claim above, to show it was an honest mistake. Thanks. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 01:29, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Can you please remove your DS alert like I asked? You can very easily check my participation at AE as one of the standard means of being “alert.” I had not expected you to double down with your harassment but I’m asking you to please stop. Mr Ernie (talk) 01:46, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Per Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Discretionary_sanctions#Alerts eds are not required to sift through AE archives. If you want, sure I'll delete it, or you can. But its still in your talk page history, which I can't change, and its still in the system log, which I can't change. Do you still want me to redact it? No problem but given the limitations of what I can do I wanted to verify that's what you want. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 02:04, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- What sifting are you taking about? I have 3 “alert” satisfying edits in my last 50 edits tab. This takes less than 10 seconds to check. I don’t know how to ask more directly - please stop. Refresh yourself with the details of alertness and remove this harassment from my talk page. It’s so easy to check. Mr Ernie (talk) 02:13, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Those are defined as adequate evidence to show someone is AWARE when starting an AE complaint. The rules about alerts do not require looking for them. But sure, I'll be happy to redact the template. If you want to delete the thread, have at it. it's your talk page. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 02:27, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Just spend a minute longer and check. It’s really not hard. Thanks for removing. Cheers. Mr Ernie (talk) 02:54, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- You within your rights to formally propose a rule change, and if that produces an amendment to the DS Alert system, I'll be glad to do the modified process. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 12:05, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Just spend a minute longer and check. It’s really not hard. Thanks for removing. Cheers. Mr Ernie (talk) 02:54, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Those are defined as adequate evidence to show someone is AWARE when starting an AE complaint. The rules about alerts do not require looking for them. But sure, I'll be happy to redact the template. If you want to delete the thread, have at it. it's your talk page. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 02:27, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- What sifting are you taking about? I have 3 “alert” satisfying edits in my last 50 edits tab. This takes less than 10 seconds to check. I don’t know how to ask more directly - please stop. Refresh yourself with the details of alertness and remove this harassment from my talk page. It’s so easy to check. Mr Ernie (talk) 02:13, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Per Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Discretionary_sanctions#Alerts eds are not required to sift through AE archives. If you want, sure I'll delete it, or you can. But its still in your talk page history, which I can't change, and its still in the system log, which I can't change. Do you still want me to redact it? No problem but given the limitations of what I can do I wanted to verify that's what you want. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 02:04, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Offtopic sidebar from RSN
In reply to your request for diffs[2] related to my "multiple salvos" remark, you've made four comments in the RSN thread about Rep Thompson and talk about the word "coup". In those you named several people and said they said something and maybe they did or maybe that's your characterization after the passage of years. Unless you provide sources, how can one know, unless they possess extensive prior knowledge about it all? That's all I meant,and I think I've answered your request for diffs. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 01:09, 13 June 2022 (UTC)